Warning: include_once(/home/kaylward/public_html/poll/poll_cookie.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/kaylward/public_html/content/2009/02/09/alert-nationalizaton-of-health-care-in-stimulus-bill.php on line 4

Tom Daschle knew the reason why Clinton failed with his socialized medicine is because he actually let the American people in on what he wanted to do. Daschle advised Obama to sneak it in, which is what he's done. Nationalization - and rationing - of health care is in the stimulus bill! Betsy McCaughy of Bloomberg has the details.

Republican Senators are questioning whether President Barack Obama's stimulus bill contains the right mix of tax breaks and cash infusions to jump-start the economy.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill's health rules will affect "every individual in the United States" (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and "guide" your doctor's decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, "Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis." According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and "learn to operate less like solo practitioners."

Read all of Betsy's article and then pass it on to everyone you know. Rush has been all over this today to bring it to people's attention. Call your senators and representatives. Currently, phone calls to Capitol Hill are 100 to 1 against the bill. We need to do more. This is why Barack Obama is going all over the country scaring the American people into believing that our economy could collapse if the bill isn't passed. He wants this made into law before anyone knows that nationalized - and rationed - health care will be the result. If you have a loved one with a serious medical condition, this will be detrimental to his or her life.

As discussed by Rush and others, embedded in the "stimulus" bill is a creation of the "Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research" which would essentially be empowered to ration treatments based on factors such as life expectancy and cost effectiveness which would result in medical dollars for older patients being denied and transferred for the use of younger, "still productive" patients.

It would seem that an appropriate question would be whether Ted Kennedy's incurable brain malady would have been determined "a waste of resources" and thus rationed/denied services?

Of course those of us who haven't drunk the kool-aid know that answer to this. We all know that every day American suckers will be stuck with rationed care while those like Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the ruling class will exempt themselves.

Update II: Just this morning I walked into our bedroom with the tv on (the one without the dvr) just as Megyn Kelly was wrapping up her interview with Arlen Specter. She asked him about this health care provision that is in the bill he is voting for. Unsurprisingly, Specter had no idea about this massive intrusion into health care. He sputtered and stuttered and said it was a bad idea and would get corrected. My question is when? The senate votes on it today and once it goes to conference the Democrats hold all the cards. Michelle Malkin saw that Kelly asked John Tester about the provision a short time later, too. He stumbled and bumbled as well saying he didn't know it was in the bill that "the language will be fixed if it's in there." Again, I ask, when?

The GOP should stop Hijacking the Stimulus Package and holding it Hostage because the way George Bush and the GOP spent our money will be characterized by an Era of Irresponsibility and Neglect, while Obama wants to spend our money wisely and on rebuillding Americsa, if the GOP lets him. The awful truth is that One Party has destroyed America while the other Party the Democratic Party wants to restore it.

For instance: If you have a home in which you used your money to spend on alcohol, good times and neglected your roof, your bills, and now your roof is in danger of collapsing because you used your money on good times instead of the upkeep of your home and now the Argument is you are unable to borrow money to fix your roof before it caves in because you used your money foolishly in the past is also recklesslness and neglect on the part of the lender, so they let the roof collapse.

In the Bush years 30 billion was spent in Afghanistan -- 50 billion in Iraq and now Congress wants to say we cannot spend necessary money at home which has so long been neglected? States were given no money in the Bush years and now they still want to keep money out of the States on a fraudulent theory.

It is now time to for Congress to put money back in to the United States and to spend money wisely and not fraudulently, irresponsibly and in the dark as in the Bush years. Obama believes in transparancey, hence you can find the Stimulus package on line for all to see.
GOP say this money will be more of the same. It will not be more of the same. This money will be used for Americans, for jobs, to rebuild for improvement and innovations to improve life not on wars and countries which have nothing to do with American people or on big business who do not need the money.
Bush and the Republicans inherited a Surplus from the Democrats and yet the GOP has created the worst economic crisis ever. The GOP should stop hijacking the Stimulus and do the right thing and let money flow back into America again, instead of holding the Democrats hostage from their quest of bringing help to the people and restoring American again.

He/she is an Obamabot paid to go to blogs for the sole purpose of pushing Obama's agenda. You can tell by the tone and the language of her comment that it's pure propaganda that was probably pre-written for her/him by the Obama Administration.

In the Bush years 30 billion was spent in Afghanistan -- 50 billion in Iraq and now Congress wants to say we cannot spend necessary money at home which has so long been neglected?

It's not that we don't want to spend money here at home, we want actual stimulus, not porkulus, how on earth is making health records available in a national database supposed to stimulate the economy?

Who is 'holding it hostage'? The Dems have enough votes to pass it, even without a single GOP vote.

The reason is they need the cover of 'bipartisanship' on this sack of garbage that is pretending to be 'emergency' legislation. They created this but they don't want to take ownership of it, because they know it's garbage.

Wow, Angellight's comments read just like talking points the Obamessiah is using in Elk Point today. He must have made a transcript available to his disciples beforehand.
When do we line up for the microchip with our records to be implanted in our foreheads or the backs of our hands?

Agreed. IF this bloated pig gets passed, the Dems want 'plausible deniability'. They know it's going to crater the economy, so now's their best chance to get a whole lot of crap passed. Yeah, in the disaster to follow a lot of it will get cut, but some will stick... and they'll see THAT as a win.

And if they can get Republicans to sign onto it - then it'll be the REPUBLICANS who caused all the bloating, and the problems, and the crash and burn!

But hey - we've created our own aristocracy - is it any wonder they're not listening to us? 100 to 1 AGAINST the Spendulus bill, and the thing still lives? What do they want, bags of tar and feathers before they get the hint?

Even if you accept that the way to save the economy is to spend money wisely (which I dont) how does it then follow that the simulus bill spends money wisely? We are seeing billions spent on pork projects and questionable earmarks that have no stimulating purpose and bilions more that wont get spent for several years. If Obama is want to stimulate the economy why can't he take the time to go through the bill to cut out these wastefull earmarks?
What does he have to lose?

"The way George Bush and the GOP spent our money will be characterized by an Era of Irresponsibility and Neglect, while Obama wants to spend our money wisely and on rebuillding Americsa, if the GOP lets him. The awful truth is that One Party has destroyed America while the other Party the Democratic Party wants to restore it.

For instance: If you have a home in which you used your money to spend on alcohol, good times and neglected your roof, your bills, and now your roof is in danger of collapsing because you used your money on good times instead of the upkeep of your home and now the Argument is you are unable to borrow money to fix your roof before it caves in because you used your money foolishly in the past is also recklesslness and neglect on the part of the lender, so they let the roof collapse.

In the Bush years 30 billion was spent in Afghanistan -- 50 billion in Iraq and now Congress wants to say we cannot spend necessary money at home which has so long been neglected? States were given no money in the Bush years and now they still want to keep money out of the States on a fraudulent theory.

It is now time to for Congress to put money back in to the United States and to spend money wisely and not fraudulently, irresponsibly and in the dark as in the Bush years. Obama believes in transparancey, hence you can find the Stimulus package on line for all to see.

GOP say this money will be more of the same. It will not be more of the same. This money will be used for Americans, for jobs, to rebuild for improvement and innovations to improve life not on wars and countries which have nothing to do with American people or on big business who do not need the money.

Bush and the Republicans inherited a Surplus from the Democrats and yet the GOP has created the worst economic crisis ever. The GOP should stop hijacking the Stimulus and do the right thing and let money flow back into America again, instead of holding the Democrats hostage from their quest of bringing help to the people and restoring American again."

Good. Thank God they put this in the stimulus bill. The healthcare apparatus in this country is pathetic. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just brainwashed. Really, why are you all so afraid? There are other countries that have a nationalized system, works just fine (I know. I used to live in Canada and it is NOT what the right wing shows try to fear you all into thinking it is. It's a smoothly run system, no long waits on anything for anyone I know).

While we end up paying a little more in taxes, at least everyone is taken care of. It's only the far right wing that seems to think a percentage of this nation should lie in the gutter and die if they can't afford an HMO.

Some of the arguments you all seem to make over and over again to no avail can be found here:

Your link didnt give a few things.
a. Link to the study.
b. state what other countries were measured.
c. give the metrics used.

For instance do you know that other countries count and report live births different than the US. Now that little fact is important when comparing stats isnt it.

Also looking at the populatoin of the countries.

For example I think one of the netherland countries who has socialed health care is tooted as being the model. That would be great if we had less than 5 million people and the govt owned the oil industry which is how it is in that country.

Remember that communism works great.... as long as the study of it is done with populations of less than 50 people.

'Fairness of financial contribution: When WHO measured the fairness of financial contribution to health systems, countries lined up differently. The measurement is based on the fraction of a household's capacity to spend (income minus food expenditure) that goes on health care (including tax payments, social insurance, private insurance and out of pocket payments). Colombia was the top-rated country in this category, followed by Luxembourg, Belgium, Djibouti, Denmark, Ireland, Germany, Norway, Japan and Finland.

Colombia achieved top rank because someone with a low income might pay the equivalent of one dollar per year for health care, while a high- income individual pays 7.6 dollars.

"
Gee everyone is rushing to go to Columbia for their health care arent they.

"In North America, Canada rates as the country with the fairest mechanism for health system finance - ranked at 17-19, while the United States is at 54-55. Cuba is the highest among Latin American and Caribbean nations at 23-25.
"

And loook Cuba got better scores than us. That is why all those cuban refugees are swimming from Florida back to Cuba right. We kidnapped them for propaganda tools and now they are just trying to get back to their great health care system.

"Responsiveness: The nations with the most responsive health systems are the United States, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Denmark, Germany, Japan, Canada, Norway, Netherlands and Sweden. The reason these are all advanced industrial nations is that a number of the elements of responsiveness depend strongly on the availability of resources. In addition, many of these countries were the first to begin addressing the responsiveness of their health systems to people's needs.

"

Your little link left that one out. I mean why have great health care in a country when you cant get to a hospital to take advantage of it.

"WHO Director-General Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland says: "The main message from this report is that the health and well- being of people around the world depend critically on the performance of the health systems that serve them. "

Gee a sentence that actually makes sense.

You know it is easy to spend more of your GDP on health care when umm you arent protecting half the world from being taken over by terrorists and thugs.

I agree with Torch. The Democrats seem to love using "human shields" to defend their policies. Let's use Ted Kennedy as a litmus test, if you will, of this provision. Kennedy has an incurable condition, he is 76 years old, and has a health history of obesity and chronic alcoholism. Now let's challenge Democrats to give his medical treatment a "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" based on the provisions of this bill.

I do not wish to make a dying man suffer even more, but if the Democrats can parade around crippled children, then certainly Ted Kennedy should be able to take one for the team.

The USA has 300 million citizens. We are not some podunk little country like canada or france. We are talking real money here. There is no such thing as free anything. If you liberal's want to believe it is so, that is fine, but don't make me pay for it.

By the way, my mother is on medicaid and medicare and she has very good health benefits. It is only the working stiffs that refuse to take responsibility to purchase a minimal healthcare package that make the left see a need to step in. Just because there is 20 million without insurance, does not explain why. Some just don't have it taken out of their check. ww

I have a history of many serious allergic reactions to some medicines including tongue swelling and throat tightness. A new federally sponsored information delivery program that insures important medical records are available to any hospital in the event of an emergency situation only seems pretty wise to me. Who knew that this is "Socialism"? C'mon let's get serious now.

Stop drinking the kool-aid, Paul! Don't you care about your parents and grandparents? The US government will tell your elderly family members to accept their hopeless diagnoses because the the cost-effective calculations indicate that they aren't worth the money. Of course, when those in the ruling class reach old age and become ill, they will get all the medical care money can buy. You're ok with this? How do you explain your position to your parents? "Sorry mom and dad, but when you get really sick, we'll just have to put you down like we do our dogs because you're too old to spend money on." This is how you and your Democratic party treat senior citizens?

And don't forget, Paul, you'll be elderly some day, too, and when you are and become ill, your life will be reduced to nothing more than a cost-effectiveness calculation run by some bureaucrat in DC.

Retired Military posted it before I got home. Angellite, is a fraud. I immediately did a search for the text and found it posted all over the web. Even the same misspellings are there. Every comment Angellight has made is posted everywhere.

This isn't about health care - this is about avoiding the coming financial crises of Social Security, Medicare and unfunded pensions. If you deny seniors life-saving/extending treatments you won't have to pay them benefits.

But them on an ice floe and send them off to die. It's cheaper.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Hello Kim, you do know that I was the full time care giver to two elderly parents who both died in 2007, about 90 days apart of natural causes don't you. I would often take one up to the doctor in a wheelchair, then get another wheelchair and take the other up to the office as well.

My dad had an excellent health insurance program as part of his retirement package from his labor union, paid for from his union dues, that provided him excellent medical care, hospital and doctor's visits. But regardless, we seem to all get sick and old. After two stays in the hospital that Summer, he had a sudden massive stroke at home one day and died when I couldn't revive him before the firemen came to help. These same fire jobs, opponents of this bill might want to cut you know.

I really hope you're as genuinely devoted to good health care as I am, although we may differ how to get there.

Ted has a currency that's unavailable to your average person. See, he has political 'currency' and thus would be able to 'purchase' a level of treatment that would unavailable to the average person under a government/socialized healthcare system.

I'll also add that healthcare, like anything else of value, is a scarce resource with alternative uses. Socialized healthcare doesn't create more healthcare to go around* - it simply shifts the rationing from individuals to government bureaucrats. I fail to see how this is a good thing.

*Actually, it results in less since compensation becomes more influenced / controlled by government.

My god, with all the evidence out there of socialized medicine failures why are we even having this discussion?

Where do you libs think the best care and pharmaceuticals are created? Canada? lolol UK? lolol France? lolol.....no WAIT, from our government! lol

Who will provide the care you can't get in the countries with socialized medicine? Where will the new generation of cures come from? It's unf8cking believable you'd give this up for what has proven to fail everywhere elsewhere.

A good friend lives in Victoria. Wife was diagnosed with cancer. They were on treatment waiting list meanwhile it masastitized and Angela died. Oh well, TFB sez the bureaucrats.

I can't help but be reminded of a fried in the UK. He's been on a list and waiting for a relatively minor operation since August last year. While his illness isn't life threatening, it's kept him out of work since then too. He's not upset about it, though. The government has supported him all this time. And somehow, that's just fine with him.

I fear we have enter the era of people in this country wanting to have the gov't do everything for them. I think it is pure laziness. Don't have to worry or work for anything. I can see the gov't coming in to help the people who fall thru the cracks or who are truly handicap or mentally ill people. You will always have people like that. But little by little they have gotten the people use to falling back on the gov't. S/S, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and on and on it goes. But if the gov't can give you everything, it can certainly dicate how you should live and sadly for some that is just fine. Creeping socialism. It does not work, but humans never seem to learn from the past or present.